We performed a comparison between CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and Symantec Siteminder based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Access Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The Password Upload Utility tool makes it easier when setting up a Safe that contains multiple accounts and has cut down the amount of time that it takes to complete the task."
"It supports lots of requirements in the privileged access management area."
"The most important feature is managing the credentials and implementing those policies which rotate the credentials. Session Manager is also key in not letting the users have access to those credentials. Instead, CyberArk actually manages everything by itself."
"Its' quite stable."
"We can make a policy that affects everybody instantly."
"It takes people out of the machine work of ensuring credentials remain up-to-date, and handles connection brokering such that human usage and credential management remain independent."
"It has a centralized page where you can manage everything. This makes work easier. You don't have to remember different module URLs or browser applications. It is very easy to get all the secure identities of other environments into a single page, which is very important for us as it helps a lot in terms of operations, e.g., reduces management time. This is a single page where you can manage all accounts and onboard them to the CyberArk. You can then secure and see passwords from everywhere. So, there is a single pane of glass where you can manage all the identities across environments as well as across different types of identities."
"Securely protects our TAP/NUID and privileged access accounts within the company."
"If you look at our organization, and really all financial institutions, we have a lot of legacy apps. So it really helps to get Single Sign-On."
"IWA is an out-of-the-box feature. The SAML-based federation is standard for all tools. However, CA Single Sign-On has made the federation configuration way too simple and handy to set up and use."
"All of our applications get a point, click, and you are in, while we increase security at the same time."
"Federation is valuable, for sure, because we have a lot of third-party vendors that we need to integrate with, and this is a turnkey solution in some ways."
"It is reliable."
"Authentication & Authorization are important because all the sites need authentication for security purposes. That has been handled pretty well all these years with SSO."
"The solution is easy to use for our managers."
"You can quickly deploy the entire product with a basic config within couple of hours."
"CyberArk has a lot on the privileged access side but they have to concentrate more on the application side as well."
"Sometimes the infrastructure team is hesitant to provide more resources."
"The tool’s pricing and scalability can be better."
"The PTA could be improved. Currently, companies often have multiple domains and sometimes it's difficult to implement CyberArk in this kind of infrastructure. For example, you can add CPM (Central Policy Manager) and PSM (Privileged Session Manager and PVWA (Password Vault Web Access) for access, but if you want to add PTA (Privileged Threat Analysis) to scan Vault logs, it is difficult because this component may be adding multiple domain environments."
"There is some stuff that we still have not fully integrated, which is our AIM solution. We are having all types of issues with it. I have been working with Level 3 support on it, but otherwise, from a functionality perspective, everything has been working except for the AIM solution."
"There were a lot of manual steps in the initial setup which could have been automated. I read the 10.4 release that was sent out about a month or two ago, and I saw the steps required for upgrade have been reduced by about 90%. That was a big thing for me, but I still haven't seen that yet because we have not upgrade past 9.9.5."
"The documentation is rather basic and it is missing many use cases."
"More than the product itself, there is room for improvement in the documentation. The documentation should be very detailed and very structured. It has a lot of good information, on one level, but I feel that it could be more elaborate and more structured."
"The GUIs are not very clear, especially when integrating with other products from CA."
"An area Siteminder could improve on is that there are a few limitations, in terms of new protocols for OpenID. If I want to have different scopes, the features are limited. They also do not have APIs exposed, which is a major drawback. API is a feature I would like to see included in the next release."
"We're currently unable to find information about if the solution can do a full implementation with SQL. Some better and more accessible documentation for new users or those curious about the product would be helpful."
"The main thing is we do not have the traceability and good monitoring that CA can provide us to capture problems when they occur."
"Some of the new protocols, like OAuth 2.0, could be improved."
"The technical support could be better."
"I would prefer to see their SAML integration be a more streamlined and easier interface."
"They need to make configurations easier, and not have the engineer having to guess what will happen when he changes a particular setting."
More CyberArk Privileged Access Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is ranked 1st in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 142 reviews while Symantec Siteminder is ranked 12th in Access Management with 69 reviews. CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is rated 8.8, while Symantec Siteminder is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of CyberArk Privileged Access Manager writes "Lets you ensure relevant, compliant access in good time and with an audit trail, yet lacks clarity on MITRE ATT&CK". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Symantec Siteminder writes "Easy to implement and customize and very stable". CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is most compared with Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), Microsoft Entra ID, Delinea Secret Server, WALLIX Bastion and One Identity Safeguard, whereas Symantec Siteminder is most compared with PingFederate, ForgeRock, Okta Workforce Identity, PingAccess and IBM Security Verify Access. See our CyberArk Privileged Access Manager vs. Symantec Siteminder report.
See our list of best Access Management vendors.
We monitor all Access Management reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
